Twitter is quickly becoming the latest and greatest trend for careerists to communicate withpeople they admire in the workforce. Plenty of professionals boast that it’s more personal and directed than LinkedIn, and you can probably learn a lot more about a person from his or her Twitter feed than most places on the web.

But of course, one major question comes to mind: What exactly does it mean to “communicate" with someone on Twitter—and how can you do so without coming on too strong?

Though a response isn’t always guaranteed, there are a couple of things you can do to really get influencers talking.

1. Start Small and Specific

It might not be the best idea to start your interactions by trying to reach out to Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin Group who boasts about four million Twitter followers. Judging by his feed, Branson doesn’t seem to do a whole lot of interacting with those who follow him, and there’s a good chance that someone else is helping handle his social media (so you wouldn’t be talking to the man in charge even if you tried).

However, there are plenty of influential people who don’t have as large of a Twitter base and who would jump at the chance to talk to a like-minded professional. Even more importantly, there are plenty of people who have similar interests and career goals.

For example, I’m personally really interested in journalism and media, so I follow a ton of pop culture junkies, news sources, journalists, and media-obsessed tweeters. While none of them wield the obscene amount of influence that Richard Branson does, they’re still people I look up to, and even better, they actually take the time to talk to me.

2. Look for Common Ground

Like any good conversation, the next thing you want to do is find something you have in common to talk about. This could be pretty much anything: Do you and someone you admire share a love for the same offbeat feminist publication? That’s an easy topic for your tweets. Are you and an influencer both alumni from the same college? It’s a great way to start off a conversation.

The sooner you find out what you both can offer one another, the easier it’ll be to establish a meaningful connection. On that note:

3. Make Contact

OK, so you might be wondering what type of tweet can help you make that initial contact. Of course, this varies depending on the general types of tweets that this influencer sends.

One easy place to start is articles, since many professionals share their favorite pieces on Twitter. If someone posts something interesting, feel free to tweet about your feelings on the piece—it can be as simple as, “Awesome @dailymuse piece! What’s your favorite piece of advice for a great resume?” It not only compliments the original tweeters, but it also gives the person the chance to respond if he or she wants to. Try some of these other sample tweets to get you started (using The Daily Muse as an example!):

If someone gives an opinion on a current event: “Interesting perspective @dailymuse. But what did you think about [insert other opinion]?”

If someone makes an exciting professional announcement: “Congrats @dailymuse on such great news! When is this awesome change going to be implemented?”

If someone tweets a company update: “That’s so cool, @dailymuse. How did you get the idea for that campaign?”

From there, don’t be offended or upset if influencers don’t respond. Keep interacting with them periodically (maybe a couple of times per week), whether it’s about articles or their thoughts on industry trends (typically if people are sharing their opinions, they want people to engage!). Eventually, the name recognition will begin to set in, and an influencer might get curious enough to take a peek at your profile.

4. Keep Some Distance

In any type of social media, the name of the game is to be intriguing, not overbearing. Especially if you’re trying to make a professional connection on Twitter, you don’t want to come off as a stalker. You don’t need to favorite or retweet everything that appears on your feed from a particular person, nor do you have to respond to every single tweet he or she writes. You’d be really freaked out if someone did that to you, right?

Instead, interact with someone when it seems natural. If a professional connection is what you’re after, you shouldn’t be retweeting pictures of your influencer’s cats—or kids. Instead, stick to the more professional tweets, like articles, trends, and business updates. This way, the line between personal and professional doesn’t get blurred, and you don’t seem like a cyber creep.

5. Take it Slow

Don’t assume that just because someone responded to one of your tweets that you’re now best friends; this is a mistake I’ve seen people make time and time again (and yes, myself included).

Like any relationship, your Twitter connections will take time to build. Tweeting at someone 20 times in one day won’t make you best buds, but 20 tweets to that person over the span of several months might give you a better shot. Someone should be just as interested in getting to know you as you are to know him or her.

Also, remember that you don’t have to build connections with people one at a time; you can be at varying stages with different influencers, and that’s the beauty of connecting professionally via Twitter. Additionally, as your own connectedness continues to grow, you’d be surprised how many people will start reaching out to you as they begin to see you as an influencer.

Bottom line: Twitter doesn’t just have to be an emoticon-ridden social media form; it can be a great place to network, as long as you understand boundaries and the importance of taking the time to build relationships.

WhenFacebookbought Oculus VR last week for$2 billion, many wondered if and how the social network could integrate the virtual reality experience into the social networking site.

Now, a concept video by Chaotic Moon Studios shows what an Oculus Rift-powered Facebook experience might look like. Although the headset is largely designed for gaming — thanks to its fully immersive 3D experience that makes you feel like you're actually in games, physically dodging bullets or moving your head to see virtual panoramas — it also has huge potential for other applications, such as shopping and social experiences.

The concept video specifically looks at how a Facebook user could wear the Oculus Rift to enhance online shopping on the site.

By clicking on a Facebook ad for a purse, the person in the demo is prompted to connect his Oculus Rift headset to enter a 3D virtual Facebook market, where he could walk into an assortment of stores. The user selects Nordstrom and a satchel priced at $199. He is able to wave his hands to turn the bag to get a better look, video chat with a friend for advice and ultimately make a purchase.

The headset displays a fully immersive 3D experience that makes you feel like you are actually in the game.

IMAGE: MASHABLE, CHRISTINA ASCANI

Overall, the video highlights a huge opportunity for both brands and advertisers.

Following the announcement of the purchase, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg detailed why he was so eager to invest in the company, calling it a "longterm bet on the future of computing."

"Oculus has the chance to create the most social platform ever, and change the way we work, play and communicate," he said.

Author J.K. Rowling and Warner Bros. have revealed that a Harry Potter spinoff will be released as a trilogy.

Fans first learned of the spinoff in September, when Rowling announced she had written the screenplays for a series of films.

Rowling, who released seven main Harry Potter books between 1997 and 2007 and inspired eight subsequent films based on those novels, is adapting her book Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them to create these three new "megamovies." Rowling's Fantastic Beasts, published in 2001, is also a fictional textbook used at the series' magical school, Hogwarts.

Warner Bros. executive Kevin Tsujihara detailed the plans to the New York Times:

Three megamovies are planned. The main character will be a “magizoologist” named Newt Scamander. The stories, neither prequels or sequels, will start in New York about seven decades before the arrival of Mr. Potter and his pals.

The cast has yet to be revealed, though Rowling has given some insight into project.

"The laws and customs of the hidden magical society will be familiar to anyone who has read theHarry Potter books or seen the films," she previously said in a statement.

Iconic landmarks and cities went dark for one hour on Saturday to showcase their commitment to protecting the planet for this year'sEarth Hour.

Over 7,000 cities in 150 countries joined the movement with places like the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, Times Square in New York City, the Acropolis hill in Athens and even the Kremlin in Moscow participating.

Organized by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), the movement began in 2007 in Sydney, Australia. Started by Earth Hour CEO and co-founder, Andy Ridley, its main goal was to raise awareness about climate change.

Since then, the event has become an international phenomenon that organizes the globe around a single symbolic act of turning off its lights. The effort also encourages participants to go beyond that simple act and think of new ways to create a more environmentally sustainable lifestyle.

"Earth Hour is a moment to kind of celebrate that trend and think about how we can switch the way we use electricity," Keya Chatterjee, of the World Wildlife Fund, told1010 Wins.

Check out some of the awe-inspiring photos of iconic cities and landmarks that went dark for Earth Hour.

The effects of man-made climate change, from sea-level rise to increasingly acidic ocean waters, have already become starkly apparent throughout the world. These effects are poised to worsen dramatically in coming decades due to continued emissions of greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation, according to a major new scientific report released on Sunday.

The report, which is the second installment of a three-part series of scientific updates from theU.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), sharply warns that climate change poses the greatest risks to the most vulnerable populations within all nations, and a potentially existential risk to poorer countries already struggling with food insecurity and civil conflict, as well as low-lying small island states.

According to the report, climate change is likely to ratchet up the amount of stress being placed on natural and human systems, to the point where increased loss of species is likely, along with increasingly frequent breakdowns in the functioning of human society.

In particular, the report cites the effects increased temperatures and heat waves have on essential food crops — in most cases lowering productivity — and warns of food availability and price swings that could lead to civil unrest in countries that are already having problems meeting the basic needs of their citizens. Climate change has already begun to hold back wheat and maize yields, the report found.

“Global temperature increases of 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit or more above late-20th century levels, combined with increasing food demand, would pose large risks to food security globally and regionally,” the report said.

The report says that the world is ill-prepared to manage the risks from a changing climate, and that if warming proceeds along the high end of the possible range of outcomes, climate change may overwhelm even the most well-prepared and wealthy nations. It paints a bleak picture of a hotter, more unstable future in which the combination of climate change and population growth combine to overwhelm the capacity of natural and human systems, resulting in increased poverty, conflict, and species extinction.

Societies can adapt to some of these impacts, the report says, but not all — especially if the amount and rate of warming during the 21st century turns out to be close to a worst-case scenario.

“With high levels of warming that result from continued growth in greenhouse gas emissions, risks will be challenging to manage, and even serious, sustained investments in adaptation will face limits,” said Chris Field, a scientist at the Carnegie Institution in California, who co-chaired the working group that produced the report.

“We’re not in an era where climate change is some sort of future hypothetical,” Field told reporters on Sunday. “There is no question that we live in a world that’s already altered by climate change.”

The report, which is the product of more than 300 lead authors and hundreds more contributing authors, focuses on climate change impacts as well as opportunities to adapt to a changing climate and reduce the global community’s vulnerability to climate change-related impacts. Such impacts include heavy precipitation events and coastal flooding.

In many cases, we are not prepared for the climate-related risks that we already face

In many cases, we are not prepared for the climate-related risks that we already face.

This report is part of the fifth major assessment of climate science from the IPCC, which is an intergovernmental body tasked with reviewing the state of climate science every several years, and issuing reports meant to inform policymakers. The first part of this latest IPCC assessment, on the physical evidence of climate change, was published in September 2013.

That report found that there is at least 95% certainty that humans have "been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century." It also projected global average surface temperatures are likely to exceed 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century, and will likely range from 0.54 degrees Fahrenheit to 8.64 degrees Fahrenheit above 1986-2005 levels, depending on the sensitivity of the climate as well as the amount of greenhouse gas emissions.

With this new report, the IPCC states that climate change is best viewed as a risk management challenge. It also states with increased confidence that one of the significant risks related to climate change is more or worsened civil conflict.

"We live in an era of man-made climate change," said Vicente Barros, a professor at the University of Buenos Aires and co-chair of the IPCC working group that produced the report. "In many cases, we are not prepared for the climate-related risks that we already face. Investments in better preparation can pay dividends both for the present and for the future."

The IPCC report draws its conclusions from an exhaustive review of peer reviewed scientific papers published since the group’s fourth assessment report was released in 2007. According to the new report’s summary for policymakers, which was approved by government representatives and scientists meeting in Yokohama, Japan during the past week, the number of scientific publications pertaining to climate impacts, adaptation and vulnerability more than doubled between 2005 and 2010, reflecting the increased interest in the topic and the broad and sweeping changes observed in the climate system during that time period.

The findings make clear that vulnerability to climate change and exposure to its impacts varies in large part based on non-climatic factors, such as economic and political development. Poorer countries generally have more risk exposure and less capacity to adapt to climate change than wealthy nations, the report said.

The IPCC panel also found that evidence of climate change impacts is already being seen throughout the natural world, where species are shifting their ranges in order to keep up with a warming climate, and some species are dying out at a faster rate.

The IPCC report advises that climate change adaptation work needs to be pursued simultaneously with efforts to slash emissions, pointing to data showing that long-term warming will largely be determined by the amount of greenhouse gases put into the atmosphere during the next few decades. At the same time, the world is virtually guaranteed to experience continued climate change impacts during the next few decades due to the greenhouse gases that were previously emitted.

Each molecule of carbon dioxide, which is the most important long-lived manmade greenhouse gas, can remain in the atmosphere for as many as 1,000 years, making it more urgent to cut emissions in the near future, or face continued cumulative warming for centuries to come. The new report underscores the urgency of the task before policymakers around the world — take potentially expensive actions now to reduce emissions in order to avoid the worst effects of global warming years down the road.

"Climate change has already delivered severe economic damage and things will only get worse without more action," said Andrew Steer, the president of the World Resources Institute, a Washington-based think tank, in a press statement. "The report makes it clear that deep and rapid cuts in emissions can greatly reduce the costs of these impacts. Taking action now will undoubtedly be less expensive than waiting."

As previous reports have warned, this IPCC assessment found that higher levels of warming would increase the risks of "severe, pervasive, and irreversible impacts" from global warming, including species extinction and the loss of massive polar ice sheets that could raise global average sea levels by more than two feet.

The combination of high temperature and humidity in some areas for parts of the year is projected to compromise normal human activities, including growing food or working outdoors

The combination of high temperature and humidity in some areas for parts of the year is projected to compromise normal human activities, including growing food or working outdoors.

The report singles out coastal areas, including low-lying island nations, as hot spots of elevated risk that may not be completely manageable due to the steady climb in global sea levels projected to take place during the rest of this century, as the planet warms and land-based ice sheets melt.

"Some low-lying developing countries and small island states are expected to face very high impacts that, in some cases, could have associated damage and adaptation costs of several percentage points of GDP," the report said.

Coastal areas and nations dependent upon fishing for food and revenue are likely to suffer as well, the report said, with broad changes in marine species richness and fisheries catch potential as warming and increasingly acidic seas cause species to move to different parts of the ocean. Oceans are becoming more acidic as they absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

The report sheds light on two contentious areas of climate impact studies, although it does not provide the definitive last word. In terms of the likely economic consequences of climate change, it found that additional temperature increases of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (compared to late 20th century temperatures) would cause global annual economic losses of between 0.2 to 2% of income, with losses more likely to be on the higher end of the scale. "Losses accelerate with greater warming," the report found.

Regarding human health impacts, the report found that through the middle of this century, most of the effects of climate change will be seen through the worsening of preexisting health problems, rather than the emergence of new diseases or spread of diseases to new areas.

At the high-end scenario of global warming, in which global average temperatures increase to 8.46 degrees Fahrenheit above 1986-2005 average levels by 2100, the report found that "the combination of high temperature and humidity in some areas for parts of the year is projected to compromise normal human activities, including growing food or working outdoors."

Last summer, PopCap shocked the gaming community with the announcement of a console game for its wildly popular Plants vs. Zombies franchise. The surprise was that the beloved tower defense strategy game would be reimagined as a shooter. The game, Plants vs Zombies: Garden Warfare, has been available on both the Xbox One and Xbox 360 for about a month and the reactions among most gamers have been confused at best.

Some of the gaming press questioned why PopCap would take such a drastic turn from its successful mobile roots. Some serious gamers asked why the game, with its goofy attitude, needed to be made in the first place. Despite the skepticism, reviews have been mostly positive, and rightly so; it’s a well-executed game that’s loads of fun to play. So why all the questions?

What makes Garden Warfare such a unique game is how it combines a familiar casual title with one of the most hardcore genres, making a pitch to convert mobile gamers into console gamers. Pursuing this crossover might be a gamble for PopCap, but Garden Warfare’s existence shows just how much the audience for video games is changing and it points to where the gaming industry needs to go.

The Untapped Mobile Market

Back in 2011, PopCap conducted a survey that found one out of four respondents played mobile games weekly. Those figures are only going up as more and more studios test the boundaries of what mobile can do. Plants vs Zombies was just one of the successful franchises that turned average Joes and Janes into addicts. For the past few years, mobile devices put video games of all types into the hands of people who never would have labeled themselves as “gamers.” The trend’s continued success is just hinting at how popular video games can be as a form of entertainment.

One of the hurdles for developers in the mobile gaming world is finding a business model that works for both players and the company. Plants vs Zombies 2 is a free-to-play game, and it was downloaded more than 16 million times during its first five days on the market. With that type of huge, undeniable interest in the specific franchise, why not translate the casual-friendly world ofPlants vs Zombies into a new platform where games retail for at least $40 a pop? If those players could be convinced that the world of mobile gaming is just a small sliver of the entire video game experience, it would be a win for everybody. The studios make more money and create better games, and the players get hours upon hours of fun and entertainment.

An Intro to Shooters

IMAGE: ACTIVISION

Studios making shooters have mostly come to an artistic consensus about what the games will look and feel like. The settings are usually contemporary or futuristic war zones and the player characters are usually gruff, muscle-bound men of few words. The games might have a short single-player campaign, but the bulk of the appeal in both first-person and third-person shooters is multiplayer matches. These bouts are great tests of skill, requiring players to demonstrate precise hand-eye coordination as well as good strategy.

Rather than the intense military trappings of most shooters, Garden Warfare is colorful, high-energy and funny. But don’t be fooled by the cuteness. Success with the game requires learning the same strategic elements as any match in Call of Duty. You need to manage your ammo. You need to be smart about when and how to use your class’s special skills. You need to shoot from cover. It plays like Team Fortress or any other traditional multiplayer shooter: good handling, creative map layouts, and an impressive balance across the classes.

In addition to the less intimidating visual style, everything about this title is designed to be accommodating to new players. The weapons don’t require the same finesse of, say, theBattlefield franchise, where players need to counter realistic recoil and adjust for bullet trajectory. There’s an introductory arena where players cannot use the more advanced unlocks and customized weapons, and you get a health boost if you die several times in a row. The mode is a great equalizer that lets new people try out the different classes and build their skills without being constantly slaughtered by more advanced players.

The experience of leveling up is also designed to teach gamers how to better play their characters. Rather than simply scoring experience points by killing enemies, players level up by completing challenges using the class’ special skills. As the player gets to higher levels, the challenges get more specific and ensure that you will get to know everything you are capable of with a given character. This gradual learning curve makes the game feel more like Mario Kart, where the last place player gets the best boosts, than like a match of Call of Duty, where you repeatedly get gunned down before you can line up your first shot.

All these details make playing Garden Warfare less intimidating for a new console gamer, while providing a good example of this well-known style of multiplayer genre. Removing the high barriers to entry is the first step in bringing casual players into the fold.

Xbox for Families

It’s also telling that PopCap has made its console move with Microsoft. The Xbox One has positioned itself as the console for families, devoting large amounts of its hardware power to set-top box services. Many of Microsoft’s choices with the console development quickly alienated the hardcore set, but despite the media firestorm and a higher price, the company announced that the Xbox One’s global sales surpassed 3 million units before the end of 2013. That’s not too shabby for less than two months on the market.

The multiplayer experience of Garden Warfare bears out that the people buying the console (and playing the game) are families. Chat frequently includes children’s voices rather than the cursing teenagers and twentysomethings of most multiplayer shooters. That all-ages audience is another big positive for Garden Warfare. The notoriously crude and competitive community of shooter fans, where “noob” is a major insult, is not one that welcomes beginners. By presenting the game as one that’s friendly to kids and parents on the console best suited to families, PopCap has largely protected its players from that negativity.

Garden Warfare also isn’t an isolated experiment. PopCap’s other smash hit, Peggle, has a sequel exclusively on the Xbox. The company seems to have figured out that the niche audience Microsoft is targeting is the same audience that will most likely see the appeal of a crossover between mobile gaming and console gaming. And that’s why so many people who spend their free time in the gaming space seem unsure about how to respond to the console version of the franchise: Garden Warfare isn’t meant for them.

The Garden Warfare Audience

Garden Warfare is the natural next step for casual gamers. For anyone who has been intrigued by triple A console games but is put off by the steep learning curve and unwelcoming scene, this is your gateway drug. It has a high level of polish, it’s easy to play and it’s welcoming of all ages and skill levels. There’s no restriction that only casual gamers can enjoy it, but they are the intended players. In fact, the unique tone and look could be very appealing to long-time gamers who are bored with seeing the top franchises imitate each other. It’s a breath of fresh air in a genre that could use some surprises.

Since this crossover world is uncharted territory, it’s possible that Garden Warfare will be a sales flop. However, it seems likely that this niche — an approachable take on a classic game style — will not remain a niche forever. The population of gamers is on the rise, and it’s only a matter of time before the ranks of mobile players get curious about their options on other platforms and begin to make the transition to consoles and PCs.

The rise of this new type of shooter doesn’t mean that the military simulations or power fantasies will go away. There is a long history of excellence in those genres and many developers are pushing the tried and true formulas in exciting ways. But it is a sign that shooters, and video games as a whole, are opening up to a bigger audience. The success of mobile gaming shows that this audience has a wide range of interests and is willing to devote huge amounts of time and money to the industry. The studios that figure out how to encourage crossover with games that offer technical and artistic excellence will most likely be the big success stories of this and future console generations.

It's always sad when a relationship goes south. In the case of Eat24 and Facebook, it appears to be a variation on an old story: Both parties just grew apart after an algorithm came between them.

In a blog post, Eat24, a food delivery company, totally places the blame on Facebook: “We’d love to say 'It’s not you, it’s us,' but it’s totally you. Not to be rude, but you aren’t the smart, funny social network we fell in love with several years back. You’ve changed. A lot."

The marketer then goes on to repeat an oft-leveled charge at Facebook: That it is bilking brands by hiding status updates from followers, thus forcing them to buy ads. (Facebook has repeatedly denied this.) After googling, Eat24 found that lots of marketers were making the same claim:

That means your algorithm is saying most of our friends don’t care about sushi porn, that they aren’t interested in hearing our deepest thoughts about pizza toppings. Are you listening to yourself? Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? You know that all those people clicked ‘Like’ on our page because it’s full of provocatively posed burritos and cheese puns, right?

The company also charged that Facebook's algorithm is sidelining its attempt to become more of a real-time news resource. Noting the response to Ellen DeGeneres' selfie, the post observes:

Not to hit below the belt, but we have a lot more fun when we hang out with Twitter and Instagram. They don’t have weird algorithms, which means all of our besties get to see everything we post. You might have noticed that when Ellen decided to take a selfie of beautiful people being beautiful, she did it on Twitter. And she got so many RTs, she broke it. The whole site went down. When was the last time you got that much action?

In response, Brandon McCormick, a Facebook rep posted a defense:

Hey Eat24, this is Brandon over at Facebook. I was bummed to read your letter. The world is so much more complicated than when we first met – it has changed. And we used to love your jokes about tacquitos and 420 but now they don’t seem so funny. There is some serious stuff happening in the world and one of my best friends just had a baby and another one just took the best photo of his homemade cupcakes and what we have come to realize is people care about those things more than sushi porn (but if we are in the mood for it, we know where to find it Eat24!). So we are sorry that we have to part this way because we think we could still be friends - really we do. But we totally respect you if you need some space.

Eat24 claims it will delete its Facebook page at 11:59 p.m. ET on Monday. At this writing, the page had close to 71,000 Likes. Ironically, the post looks like one of Eat24's most popular ever, with 2,100 Likes (versus a range of about a dozen to 150 Likes for other updates).

The United Nations' International Court of Justice on Monday ordered Japan to stop its whale hunting, dismissing the country's argument that the whaling is for scientific purposes.

"Japan shall revoke any existent authorization, permit or license granted in relation to JARPA II [research program] and refrain from granting any further permits in pursuance to the program," the International Court of Justice's Judge Peter Tomka said on Monday.

Australian Professor of Law, Philippe Sands, left, Justin Gleeson, center, and Bill Campbell, right, wait for the International Court of Justice to deliver its verdict in The Hague, Netherlands, Monday March 31, 2014.

IMAGE: PHIL NIJHUI/ASSOCIATED PRESS

Whale hunting is forbidden worldwide after a 1986 International Whaling Commission (IWC) moratorium, but Japanese whalers still go on a hunt every year. Whale meat is available for human consumption in Japan. The Australian government challenged notion that Japan hunts whales for scientific study, which lead to Monday's ruling.

Packs of whale meat to be sold sit in a freezer at a whale meat specialty store at Tokyo's Ameyoko shopping district, Thursday, March 27, 2014.

IMAGE: SHIZUO KAMBAYASHI/ASSOCIATED PRESS

Environmentalist group Sea Shepherd, which uses direct tactics like chasing down Japanese ships in an effort to stop whalers from hunting, welcomed the court's decision.

“With today’s ruling, the ICJ has taken a fair and just stance on the right side of history by protecting the whales of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary and the vital marine ecosystem of Antarctica, a decision that impacts the international community and future generations,” saidCaptain Alex Cornelissen of Sea Shepherd Global.

For its part, Japan said it would obey the decision, but it "regrets and is deeply disappointed" by it.